How did you like that movie / TV show / book?

[elton]

Okay then .... Puzzzlywuzzlies

 

[LeeVanCleef]

Elton, you gotta get with the 21st century! No commercials when you BitTorrent! I haven't seen a commercial in a decade so that, when I do during, say, a live sporting event, I have to wonder at exactly the time and date our civilization will completely collapse... because, judging by the commercials, I think we need to be counting in months instead of years. Hey, I grew up in the '70s, a decade not exactly known for its subtlety, but when I see today's commercials chock full of explosions, morons with too much money and old people who can't get erections... it makes me think that, yes, I would most definitely like to be a Pepper, too.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Man, I'm with you, Elton! I made it to the end of season 2 of Boardwalk (over in The Colonies it's on HBO, so no commercials, as long as you pay them $20 a month)... and I just didn't care. And I wanted to care! 1920s gangsters, produced by Scorsese, starring Steve Buscemi? That should be right up my alley! How did they manage to bore the crap out of me?

 

[elton]

They succeeded in boring me too ... almost unheard of but there ya go!

 

[Isaac Sauvage]

so what was the story with the godfather remake...?

can i get some closure, heah!

 

[sleepy]

1920s gangsters, produced by Scorsese, starring Steve Buscemi? That should be right up my alley! How did they manage to bore the crap out of me?

Because Scorsese wrote it? Hey, I'll tell you what.
The next time I see DeNiro at the corner liquor store munching on a bag of Doritos, I'll ask him. Hey Bobby. What gives with Scorsese?

 

[LeeVanCleef]

so what was the story with the godfather remake...?

can i get some closure, heah!

That apparently got lost somewhere up above. Not a remake so much as a reshuffling. It's definitely more of a curiosity that's fun to watch if you're already well-versed in the originals.

I'm gonna say that this probably isn't my preferred way to watch the Godfather movies. The Michael part of part II becomes a turgid sludge without DeNiro's young Vito to balance it out. But when it was originally aired in... '79, '80?... during all those Thorn Birds and Shoguns, The Godfather Novel for Television was the best damn miniseries on the air! Well... Roots was good, too.

 

[Isaac Sauvage]

oops e. daisy... well, thanks!
and what about the extra content... not enough to swing the deal?


btw, shogun is absolutely my favorite mini-series and a fairly brilliant translation of the book IMO. i'll allow godfather beating it as a mini-series, yet that's also not a fair comparison, eh. imagine shogun with a top film director and a big movie budget.

 

[sleepy]

Richard Chamberlain did several excellent mini series for NBC, Shogun, and Alexander Dumas' " The Count of Monte-Cristo" and "The Man in the Iron Mask"

 

[LeeVanCleef]

oops e. daisy... well, thanks!
and what about the extra content... not enough to swing the deal?


btw, shogun is absolutely my favorite mini-series and a fairly brilliant translation of the book IMO. i'll allow godfather beating it as a mini-series, yet that's also not a fair comparison, eh. imagine shogun with a top film director and a big movie budget.

Oh, yeah... it's not fair at all! There weren't any other miniseries that featured Al Pacino in the "Richard Chamberlain" part! The extra scenes are... illuminating, at best. The extra parts during the DeNiro chapter actually do expand on the story... but they would have forced GFII into an over-four-hour running time! The extra scenes for the first Godfather, however, show what a supreme job Coppola did on making that movie relatively lean and mean. While the parts are faithful to what happens in the novel, they're far from necessary and often serve to bring the story to a screeching halt. What's weird to imagine is that the extra... 20, 30 minutes?... may have been enough to ruin the first film's shot at being a classic if those scenes had been left in.
I never got to see more than a couple minutes of the Shogun miniseries when it aired. Bor-ring! So once I read and thoroughly enjoyed the book in the late '90s, (I'm currently sitting on the audiobook with plans to take another tour of Japan!) it was far out of reach. But, as you said, that's probably for the best. I'm thinking it would probably look about as good as that Dr. Pepper commercial I posted. EDIT: Not that I want Hollywood to sign up for a crappy remake of it! Hell, after writing that, it means it's probably too late. It's kinda like saying "Beetlejuice" three times. Once you mention "crappy Hollywood remake" of something, they immediately start holding meetings.

 

[elton]

Dear me. Godfather ... what a film load of poop. GF2 and 3 exactly the same poop. Worse film I ever saw [or rather didn't really see ... turned off part way through on each occasion of viewing].

Over hyped crap IMHO.

Shogun though, I love. I like Japanese stuff. Last Shogun etc :) Happiness in a film.

 

[sleepy]

It's too late Bill. I've already talked about a Shogun movie with the locals.
But when I make specific suggestions, like for Shogun (or a film version of Stephen King's It) they ignore it. Mostly.
Now I did once suggest a movie about a psycho who ran around skinning women for his fineries. But they loved that one. So they wrote the book first. And then I suggested a story about a psycho who ran around killing women for his perfumes.
And they loved that one too.

The locals love psychos. Go figure...

 

[LeeVanCleef]

Dear me. Godfather ... what a film load of poop. GF2 and 3 exactly the same poop. Worse film I ever saw [or rather didn't really see ... turned off part way through on each occasion of viewing].

Over hyped crap IMHO.

Seriously, Elton? Maybe it's a geographical thing. The last Krays movie was a real snoozer for me and now they want me to see it again with Tom Hardy and Tom Hardy starring?

Yeah, GF3... so bad. Oh, so bad.

 

[sleepy]

GF III needed fixed. I thought the Joey parade was great, as was the big scream.
I think Sophia didn't convey her complacency to the audience in a manner that was understood as a story point (EDIT: a character trait). Too many of us only saw weak acting when the character was suffering from being disconnected and overprotected.
I thought the helicopter hit was waay over the top, though plausible. It needed to be replaced with gorilla terrorists. But that was done for the attempt against the Andy Garcia character. Still...

But that "Big Scream". When Michael sought confession in Italy while suffering his diabetic seizure, that Should Have Been a moment when he struggles to discuss his conscious apprehensions and concerns for his daughter. And he can't do it. He can confess to murder. But he can't talk about her.
And then, the confessional priest should have fingered Michael, not for murder, but as a vendetta for killing an associate of the priest's financial agreement with the corporation. And he then should have been the one who got nailed in the throat. And add a montage of the faithful paying their tithes to the offering plate while the money is used to launder the dirt. Ending with a business discussion between George and Eli over drinks and who to eliminate next.

What are your favorite bad moments?

 

[sleepy]

Oh yeah. Those schmaltzy flashbacks at the end with the ladies. No good. They were secondary. The main purpose was to protect the home and the business. Which is why Mary is also neglected, and overprotected.

Michael is sitting in an old and familiar place. Upright in a chair. He is remembering from a distant place. Memories of Vito and what he said to do to stay alive and to defend. The low incremental roar of a train is heard approaching. Like the roar of a train from a thousand years ago as heard by a younger man, though now is a quieter, smooth-rolling roar. Almost pleasant.

Michael slumps from his chair, and dies.

And Eli being poisoned by those confections. I would have preferred him to be smart enough to avoid it, given that he was putting the hit on the Corleone.

So Vincent appears in Don Altobello's opera box, his face covered like a Jihadi John,
and he slits his throat. Connie Corleone observes this with her opera glasses.

 

[Isaac Sauvage]

i'm going to PRETEND that i didn't hear any particular nonsense about shogun or the godfather, just now.

let's just say that you're a couple of idiots. or let's just say that i am. either way is fine, godammit it.

 

[elton]

The Krays film was truly awful too. Bit of a car crash of a film ... not sure about the newer one. Not seen that one yet.

Damn Sleepy ... you have quite a memory!
I usually cannot remember films in such detail .... even after seeing them :D

@Ike .... Godfather still sucks no matter how much you like it :D

 

[sleepy]

I usually don't remember films either. Only when I have a vested interest or I've fixed them myself after it's too late to cry about it.

Clarice probably should have been accompanied to that "Wrong Address" by a male FBI agent for backup, and who is beguiled by Jame Gumb during casual questioning.
Just as Clarice notices a spool of leather-grade thread (fine upholstery thread) sitting on the nearby counter with a needle and a remnant of silk, very uncharacteristic for a man to have, the male backup is clobbered with a cast iron skillet at the entrance to the kitchen.

Then the fun begins.

 

[LeeVanCleef]

i'm going to PRETEND that i didn't hear any particular nonsense about shogun or the godfather, just now.

Oh, come on! In my defense I was 14. "Miniseries" and "Richard Chamberlain" wasn't a big draw for my crowd. Plus, after all the Thorn Birdsing, they really played up the "forbidden romance" aspect of Shogun in the previews. BOR-ing! Fortunately, Charlie's Angels was still on the air at the time. I probably watched it.

arne, when it comes to GF3, I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Could be your fault, could be the fact that I've managed to erase GF3 from my memory. One thing I do know is that Sofia Coppola made a much better director. And, if the rumors are true, a much better nude album-cover model!



Seriously though... Third Eye is one great album! And this song is just waiting for a summer day and car windows to crank down while you blast it.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Isaac Sauvage]

What Exactly Does A Movie Director Do?

The Director of a film (or a play, or a television show episode) is the person responsible for the creative vision of the piece. They create a concept from the script (which may or may not be something concretely found in the script, it may be metaphorical or tangential) and from the concept lead the design and production team towards a collaborative vision. Once rehearsals/filming have begin, the director blocks the piece (i.e. tells actors where to move), provides objective and subtextual support to the actors (i.e. tells them why they are saying the things the writer wrote) and ensures that the visual style and setting are within the original vision or concept parameters.

In film, they also work closely with the DP, first story-boarding the script, and then, once on set, making sure that each shoot is framed, blocked and shot per their vision. Including ALL design aspects, from the color of the walls to the type of purse a character might wear.

In essence they are the Captain of the ship. A lot of my notes below can also be laid at the feet of bad writing, but in film (less so TV and theatre) directors have a great deal of oversight on the writing, so they are typically held accountable if the writing is terrible.

A film which has been directed badly will usually (but not always, the problem with a collaborative art form, which is what film is, is that there are many, many chefs in the kitchen. However, since the director tends to get the credit when everything works, they also tend to get the blame when it doesn’t)–usually show the following flaws:

Incoherent story telling. You don’t know what is happening. Or why it is happening. Or who it is happening to. Sometimes things are just blatantly implausible.

Cliche or trope ridden dialogue/shots/events. You feel like you’ve seen all of these things before. All the characters are stereotypes, all the plot points unfailingly predictable. Note: cliches, tropes and stereotypes can all be used well. But bad directors tend not to.

Bad dialogue. Dialogue that is forced and unnatural. Dialogue that is too on-the-nose. People telling other people things instead of doing things. People explaining how they feel ad nauseam. Dialogue spoken only to allow for the plot to push forward, leading us to:

Coincidental plotting, or plots hole you could drive a freight train through (not the small inconsistencies that almost every movie has, but HUGE giant massive oh-my-god-this-movie-is-broken plot holes). Coincidental plotting is when everything that has to happen for the plot to move forward does, without any effort on the part of the hero (or the bad guy).

Bad acting. Directors are responsible for getting a performance out of their actors, so even if the actor can’t act (one reason why casting is important) the director is still the one people are going to hold responsible for any painful moments on screen (this is less true in TV and theatre).

Over or under designed. Over designed is when the concept/vision of the piece becomes more important then any other element. Think 300: Rise of an Empire or Sin City: A Dame to Kill For (not-at-all-oddly, both Frank Miller graphic novel adaptations, where the look was where the design team started with). Tim Burton is also a well-known director who can go to far with his vision/design to the point of over balancing the movie. Under designing is when there is a lack of design and the production feels (usually) cheap or not-thought-through. Good design elevates the narrative, supports the characters and provides visual clues to the audience about what is happening–excellent design can comment on and complement the action, enhancing the entire experience.

Movies/TV only: bad editing. Either because there were technical difficulties during filming and the needed shots weren’t gotten (or a director wasn’t prepared and didn’t get the shots they needed), and therefore the editor is attempting to make up for missing and/or bad shots; or because the editing itself is just bad. Odd cuts, odd shots going back to back, odd audio issues. Various other things. While most early directors at a studio on a movie won’t have any say over the final cut, most editing issues are from a lack of footage (which is the director’s issue), not bad editing. OR a director who does have final cut approval and shouldn’t, which is where you got a three-hour movie that should have been 2 hours and 10 minutes max.

Poor production value. An overall feel that the movie wasn’t cared for (this isn’t about money, this is about time and support). Usually shows in bad lighting, bad audio, bad set dressing, bad costumes–just an overall sense that these things weren’t considered important or there wasn’t time to pay attention to them.

A film, tv show or theatrical play is an immense, multi-part beast, and the Director is the one that tries to tame it. To varying degrees of success. Every director probably has one (or many) bad movies to their name, as its how we all learn. The more telling test is not if they directed a bad movie, but if people wanted to work with them again. And, sometimes, the love of the thing they are creating can shine through the worst movie and make it, somehow, good (think Sam Raimi’s original Evil Dead).

– daijobu16​

well!

sounds... rea - son - a - bull?

 

[Isaac Sauvage]

i've been getting in to downton abbey lately. it reminds me of "remains of the day" and old masterpiece opera series, like "upstairs - downstairs." much to my good fortune, it seems to have just wrapped up its final season, so is waiting for me to savor at whatever pace i might desire.

interestingly, it seems to be a huge hit across the world. even places like china are doing their own versions, i seem to recall reading.

 

[LeeVanCleef]

Uhg, Downton Abbey! I just couldn't do it. It's not that it's a bad show... well-written, well-acted, some very pretty people... but I just couldn't stay awake! The movie it really resembles is Gosford Park... that's because Gosford is written by the same guy who did Downton Abbey. "Hey, remember that movie I wrote about all the shenanigans going on at an English estate? I've decided to stretch it out over five seasons!" Thanks, but no thanks.
Now if you're looking for BBC fun with a higher body count, then you don't want to miss The Last Kingdom! Just like Downton it's well-written and well-acted and really catches the time-period extremely well. Unlike Downton, there's a lot more stabby-stab. This really was the best new series of the 2016 season. It's a shame that only a handful of Limeys saw it.

 

[LeeVanCleef]

Nic, over in the Nuggets thread, we're discussing this wonderful song. I couldn't figure out why I don't have a karaoke version and went a-searchin'... and came up empty! This is the first time in years I've searched for a relatively popular song and not found a karaoke version of it! Help me, Ike Savage... you're my only hope!

(PS: What a weird video! No, you boys just go ahead and sit down while you're pretending to play your instruments. We don't want you to get all tired out.)

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Isaac Sauvage]

downton abbey-- i'm sure it helps that i'm pretty ravenous about historical fiction. still, it's a series that i've had to kind of ease my way through, frequently pausing episodes and surfing reddit by way of a break.

part of the fascination no doubt involves the fact that these people are so droll and reserved on the surface, yet so tempestuous underneath. you have to kind of wait for things to play out, but when they do, the resonance is much greater than more action-oriented series.

you know, a companion piece on the series helped to clarify the whole situation-- apparently in the wake of the several french revolutions, the english nobility were fairly terrified of the same thing happening in their own country. as a response, they came up with a rather exacting code of mannerisms and behavior so as to be 'held accountable' as i understand it. i.e. they didn't want to be associated with the excesses of behavior that the french lords slipped in to. they didn't want to give the working class any cheap excuses to agitate.

as an example, this involved things such as attaching blades to the back of their childrens' chairs so they would learn to sit ramrod straight at all times, i.e. it involved far more than just suppressing emotion. indeed, overall it involved essentially murdering parts of yourself in a self-censurious kind of way, as well as finding new, creative (and deceitful) escape valves.

i also see a lot of parallels with japanese culture-- sort of tragic and weirdly fascinating, both. so i think once you understand that boredom and dullness is the order of the day, it's the unpredictable events that really make the show. also, there's the sort of 'sleuthing-aspect' of being able to sense things coming and trying to guess correctly how they play out.

*shrug* :)

 

[Isaac Sauvage]

i don't see it in my karaoke collections (indeed, weird!), but there are several versions on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=outsiders+karaoke+time+won't

you know how to convert youtube to video files?

 

[GSGregg]

LLoyd Thaxton is alive.....a-LIVE!!

Complaint dept: I could never get trumpet sounds out of my guitar.